Political Science?

The New York Times ran an article on Sunday by Professor Jacqueline Stevens titled Political Scientists are Lousy Forecasters. In it, she cites evidence of how poor most political science modelling is, mostly because it is government or think-tank funded and therefore comes down on the ‘right’ side of the debate. She also quotes Karl Popper who laughed at political sciences pretensions at science believing science can only be conducted in isolation or controlled conditions, a notion totally at odds with human emotional rather than rational (take note economists) behaviour.

However after returning to university and continuing to work there is some capacity, my advice to political scientists would be do some actual research. You know ‘go out there and ask questions bringing some science into what is right now is political pontificating in ivory towers. I am constantly surprised how reluctant/cowardly academics in political science are to getting their hands dirty and talking to people.

It reminds me of the row between the value of academic Laura Seay and journalist Tristan McConnell. Seay criticised journalist’s understanding and analysis in the Congo. The fact she did it in Foreign Policy, a noted top-down rag is a bad starting point. Despite Congo being her research area, she wrote this piece from Texas. She lamented the incomplete analysis while welcoming the exposure of issues of poverty and violence. While we all wish for thorough research, this can take years. While our professor is happily writing away, getting paid and going home to the family, these problems are not going away. Thorough analysis is welcomed but NGOs and journalists on the ground are savvy and intelligent enough to get to the nub fairly quickly.

What i think we are really hearing is the ground lost by academia in the public mind and to some degree its relevance. Academic research didn’t highlight or predict the fall of Yugoslavia or report the massacres to the world. Its prescription has also failed Bosnia since. If they do comment, it all comes too late. I was even invited to a conference on whether academics should be more public involved. Naturally the first day was reserved for debating what is ‘involved!’

Sociology is always the way forward.

Advertisements

One thought on “Political Science?

  1. Big political decisions are only ever made on the basis of political need. Political Scientists are puppets, there to trick us into believing that, because of their academic background and nature of their work, we (the masses) must believe what they say. How could we question a Political Scientist?

    Too much research could hinder political policy by contradicting it, handing advantage to the other side. And that is all politics is about, defeating the opposition.

    Maybe we have misinterpreted the role of the political scientist. Maybe their role is about being clever enough to write evidence up from various sources, making a science of prose, transforming into a credible political argument in support of a particular policy.

    Heaven forbid policy and government decision should be shaped by real research. Have you gone absolutely mad?

    Regards
    Thomas 😉

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s